US Created 'Cuban Twitter' to Stir Dissent


Recommended Posts

By Darrell Etherington 35 minutes ago
(AP) The U.S. government created its own version of Twitter based on SMS messaging to help undermine the Cuban government, according to a new, eye-opening report by the Associated Press today. The report details efforts by a team of tech contractors to build and launch a messaging network in Cuba that would be hidden away from the country?s strict surveillance and control of the flow of information.

The network was called ?ZunZuneo,? which is Cuban slang for the song of the hummingbird, and it was designed to be essentially a so-called ?Cuban Twitter? that could function without the web and build an audience using safe content initially, like talk about sports, music and extreme weather systems moving through the area. Once there was an audience, in terms of enough regular active users, the plan was to flip the switch on content that was critical of the ruling powers, and also intent on motivating political action activities called ?smart mobs? in documents obtained by the AP.
Source
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hope it works. Time for the Castro Cartel to retire.

 

Forcing changes in a country is never a good thing. Let them change at their own pace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hope it works. Time for the Castro Cartel to retire.

 

Went offline in 2012. No money to support the program.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hope it works. Time for the Castro Cartel to retire.

 

What business is it of the US's?

 

Hell, no bugger else would let you put your Guantanamo Bay torture camp on their turf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's our business when they try to export mischief to the rest of the Caribbean and Central America. See Monroe Doctrine.

They have no choice, we have a 99 year exclisive lease to gitmo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's our business when they try to export mischief to the rest of the Caribbean and Central America. See Monroe Doctrine.

They have no choice, we have a 99 year exclisive lease to gitmo.

You must be a republi... Actually, nevermind!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go ahead, but you're wrong.

I'm actually a lapsed center-right Democrat. Was even an alternate delegate to the state convention, and during college was a union steward, committeeman and negotiator.

Quit the party when the left-wingnuts took over and only wanted members who would follow their loopy dogma. Quit the union when I realized the leadership was nothing but crooks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Peaceful coexistence cannot be limited to the powerful countries if we want to ensure world peace. Peaceful coexistence must be exercised among all states, regardless of size, regardless of the previous historical relations that linked them, and regardless of the problems that may arise among some of them at a given moment." - Che Guevara
"Thanks for Playa Gir?n. Before the invasion, the revolution was weak. Now it's stronger than ever." - Che Guevara

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's our business when they try to export mischief to the rest of the Caribbean and Central America. See Monroe Doctrine.

They have no choice, we have a 99 year exclisive lease to gitmo.

 

Unless the "mischief" is within US borders, it's none of your business.  Just like things that go on in arab nations are also none of your business, but you stick your oar in anyways.

 

And a lease means diddly. they could still easily either demand the US remove it, or throw you out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See Monroe Doctrine.

 

The Monroe Doctrine was a US foreign policy regarding Latin American countries in the early 19th century. It stated that further efforts by European nations to colonize land or interfere with states in North or South America would be viewed as acts of aggression, requiring U.S. intervention. At the same time, the doctrine noted that the United States would neither interfere with existing European colonies nor meddle in the internal concerns of European countries.

 

The occasion has been judged proper for asserting, as a principle in which the rights and interests of the United States are involved, that the American continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintain, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers.

 

We owe it, therefore, to candor and to the amicable relations existing between the United States and those powers to declare that we should consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety. With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European power we have not interfered and shall not interfere. But with the Governments who have declared their independence and maintained it, and whose independence we have, on great consideration and on just principles, acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them, or controlling in any other manner their destiny, by any European power in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition toward the United States.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The real problem is that: The world respects the US however let alone rest of the world, even her brothers sisters not receiving the half of the given-respect from the US.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Monroe Doctrine was a US foreign policy regarding Latin American countries in the early 19th century. It stated that further efforts by European nations to colonize land or interfere with states in North or South America would be viewed as acts of aggression, requiring U.S. intervention. At the same time, the doctrine noted that the United States would neither interfere with existing European colonies nor meddle in the internal concerns of European countries.

Russia, not a regional power here, + Cuba = revolutionary intrusion in neighboring countries for 40+ years = raw nerve.

Our activities in Europe are directly related to 1) most of us having backgrounds there and 2) Europe's regular seppuku attempts and habit of setting up the next war by retributions for the last one. Many of us are unconvinced it won't happen again without structures like NATO etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Russia, not a regional power here, + Cuba = revolutionary intrusion in neighboring countries for 40+ years = raw nerve.

Our activities in Europe are directly related to 1) most of us having backgrounds there and 2) Europe's regular seppuku attempts and habit of setting up the next war by retributions for the last one. Many of us are unconvinced it won't happen again without structures like NATO etc.

 

Why should that bother you?  It's not like you guys lifted a finger to help your allies until after YOU got attacked, too...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go back to your history books. Roosevelt sent material aid to the Brits once they showed they would act to prevent the French fleet at Mers-el-Kebir from falling into German hands, which was before Pearl Harbor. We became directly involved after Germany declared war on us after Pearl Harbor because of their mutual defense treaty with Japan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It really isn't surprising to see yet another revelation about the US interfering in the affairs of other nations. The US is completely hypocritical in its foreign policy. Cuba is a classic example, as the US stationed nuclear weapons in Eastern Europe in a stance against Russia yet threatened a nuclear holocaust when Russia attempted the same thing with Cuba.

 

Why should that bother you?  It's not like you guys lifted a finger to help your allies until after YOU got attacked, too...

And it was the US embargo against Japan that forced it to respond militarily.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correction. Roosevelt SOLD us material aid. He sent diddly squat out of the kindness of his heart.

Lend-Lease provided support at a 90%+ discount and with a 40 year term. This was only required because direct free support couldn't get through an isolationist Congress. In Reverse Lend-Lease Britain billed the US for services, air base rentals etc.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

....the US stationed nuclear weapons in Eastern Europe in a stance against Russia yet threatened a nuclear holocaust when Russia attempted the same thing with Cuba.

The 15 Jupiter missiles in Turkey were obsolete and coming out that year anyhow. A little problem with them partially arming themselves after lightning strikes and a Bulgarian MIG almost crashing on the base. Russia overreached when they perceived weakness in Kennedy after his first summit.

And it was the US embargo against Japan that forced it to respond militarily.

We embargoed them because of previous bad acts over a whole decade, their invasion of numerous nations, many allies, and we were in active negotiations over our differences when they blindsided us. Yeah, nice guys.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lend-Lease provided support at a 90%+ discount and with a 40 year term. This was only required because direct free support couldn't get through an isolationist Congress. In Reverse Lend-Lease Britain billed the US for services, air base rentals etc.

 

Allies are meant to help allies at times of need, not charge them.

 

Did we charge Poland a penny for coming to their aid?  Nope.  Your congress sucks at helping friends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's our business when they try to export mischief to the rest of the Caribbean and Central America. See Monroe Doctrine.

They have no choice, we have a 99 year exclisive lease to gitmo.

 

Americans complaining about other nations exporting "mischief"... ohh.. that's good. 

The Monroe Doctrine was a US foreign policy regarding Latin American countries in the early 19th century. It stated that further efforts by European nations to colonize land or interfere with states in North or South America would be viewed as acts of aggression, requiring U.S. intervention. At the same time, the doctrine noted that the United States would neither interfere with existing European colonies nor meddle in the internal concerns of European countries.

 

So Americans have broken that numerous times then...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Allies are meant to help allies at times of need, not charge them.

 

Did we charge Poland a penny for coming to their aid?  Nope.  Your congress sucks at helping friends.

 

The issue was to get around a Congress.  Remember though, any bases that were setup et all in Great Britain were not free either.  So we "charged" England for those options, and England "charged" the United States for the access required to use those options. 

 

I do not think that Poland charged England any rent for where the soldiers were stationed.

 

It was a way to pass funny money around so there was no real cost.

 

 

 

*Now the whole point about Congress sucking et all is a completely different story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.